"Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops, like bishops, and your religious act like religious." - Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, 1972

The former Accion Hotel, worth tens of millions of dollars before an anonymous donor donated it to the Archdiocese of Agana almost a decade ago, is no longer an asset of the local Catholic church, according to a Guam law firm retained recently by Concerned Catholics of Guam Inc.

Not withstanding all the feeble denials that the property was still in the possession of the Archdiocese, the language is quite clear even to those without a legal degree that the property was deeded to RMS in perpetuity, but CCOG had to engaged the services of an attorney to make it perfectly clear that indeed the property was indeed stolen from the laity and gifted forever to the RMS Neo seminary. Now money has to be spent in court to take back what rightfully belongs to the Guam Catholics. Evil to know that while Kiko has millions and millions of dollars, Apuron choose the route of stealing from the poor to gift to the rich. Shameful. Kiko, do what is right for the first time in your life and gracefully return the stolen property. I will however, not hold my breath.

Why must property be RESTRICTED? If it belongs to Archdiocese as the Archdiocesan Seminary as it was intended by the donor then this restriction seems very uneccesary....explain why the deed of restriction,Diana, and many will be understanding. The property not willy hilly offered. It was given for a special purpose. That purpose never was specifically for the NCW.

The restriction states that the property should be used as a seminary. So, why do you have a problem with this restriction? Is this not a good restriction.....to restrict its use for a seminary?

Let us say that I own a house, and I put a restriction on my house. The restriction I put on my house is that it will not be used for rental purposes. I and my children can live in the house but due to its restriction, my children cannot put up the house for rent without my permission. Who does the house belong to? It is still my house because I did not sell it nor give a deed of gift to anyone. There was no transfer, only a restriction.

Aside from public protests, public rosaries and getting petitions signed, which are all well and good, may I suggest also that we carry out a person-to-person campaign of suggesting to people we know, one person at a time, that they stop contributing to the collection box on Sundays and whenever the collection box is passed out?

You readers are wise enough to know the effects of such a suggestion, so I won't belabor the point.